There really is no need for all NANOG meetings to have the same format. In fact, if we accept the idea of varying formats, then some of the cost issues can be tamed. For instance, one full meeting, one regional meeting, and one special-focus meeting per year. The full meeting could be the one that is done in conjunction with ARIN in a major center with full free networking, beer and gear etc. The regional meeting would be in a smaller city with the expectation that the majority of attendees are from the local area and don't have access to big travel budgets. And the special focus meetings would target some specific topic and pick a location to match. Some of the regional and special focus meetings would not supply comprehensive free Internet access. If Internet access is available people would pay for it and expect bandwidth limitations and higher than normal latency. Depends on the location. Here are some exotic locations that could work with a special focus. Iqaluit, the capital of Nunavut is rather exotic. The native language is neither English nor French nor Spanish. It has the issues of remoteness and reliance on satellite telecommunications. New Orleans has dealt dramatically with disaster recovery and rebuilding infrastructure. It is exotic because it is still in the process of rebuilding unlike most American cities. St. John's, Newfoundland - a British colony until 1949 when it joined Canada, this is located on a large island, has a history in trans-atlantic telecommunications and still has a certain amount of undersea fiber connectivity. Montpelier, Vermont is the smallest state capital in the USA, located in the Vermont,New Hampshire, Maine area which is rather more rural than the average in the USA as well as being somewhat mountainous terrain. If you don't count New Orleans before Katrina, I'd guess that well over 90% of NANOGers have never been to any of these four cities. Other special focus areas might be: Government and the Internet, Government and IPv6 - Washington DC. The Research Community and the Internet - Ann Arbor MI Network Security from a Military Viewpoint - Sierra Vista AZ near US Army's CECOM-ISEC headquarters Strategic Aspects of Network Security - Harrisburg PA not far from US Army War College Strategic Studies Institute in nearby Carlisle The idea of regional meetings is mainly to have a scaled down NANOG to reach a much wider audience that does not have a large conference travel budget. This is rather similar to RIPE's meetings in Qatar, Moscow, Bahrain, Nairobi and Tallinn. The idea of special focus meetings is to do something entirely new, perhaps redefining the NANOG role and audience in the process. It is clear that the traditional NANOG audience is shrinking because the traditional Internet provider has been mostly replaced by larger general telecommunications providers. The same old topics and same old restricted set of participants doesn't have enough future potential to keep NANOG running in the long term. Special focus meetings can help bring in new blood. ------------------------------------------------------- Michael Dillon Capacity Management, 66 Prescot St., London, E1 8HG, UK Mobile: +44 7900 823 672 Internet: michael.dillon@btradianz.com Phone: +44 20 7650 9493 Fax: +44 20 7650 9030 http://www.btradianz.com One Community One Connection One Focus
In article <OF9A37B643.83E62299-ON8025723B.003D5C0C-8025723B.0041CAB1@btradianz.com> , Michael.Dillon@btradianz.com writes
The idea of regional meetings is mainly to have a scaled down NANOG to reach a much wider audience that does not have a large conference travel budget. This is rather similar to RIPE's meetings in Qatar, Moscow, Bahrain, Nairobi and Tallinn.
I am just back from very successful Regional Meetings in Moscow and Bahrain, where it's true that the focus is local members, and where regional meetings of any kind are often a rarity. But Tallinn is the venue for RIPE 54, in the same vein as Istanbul (RIPE 52) and Stockholm (RIPE 50). -- Roland Perry Public Affairs Officer, RIPE NCC
On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 Michael.Dillon@btradianz.com wrote: > There really is no need for all NANOG meetings to have the same format. > For instance, one full meeting, one regional meeting, and one > special-focus meeting per year. I'll truncate the rest of Michael's excellent post for the sake of brevity, but say that this is one of the best ideas I've heard in a long, long time. At once, it addresses both of the big issues that NANOG is facing: scope creep, and irrelevancy. Though I'd assumed the best way of dealing with the former would be trimming back to two meetings a year, I like Michael's way better. -Bill
participants (3)
-
Bill Woodcock
-
Michael.Dillonļ¼ btradianz.com
-
Roland Perry